October 18, 2012
futurejournalismproject:

New Statesman Tries to Bypass the Great Firewall
The New Statesman’s current issue focuses on China and the magazine has created a Mandarin version of it as a PDF. Their hope is to get the publication around Chinese censors by using various torrent sites.
Via the New Statesman:

What will [Chinese readers] find inside? A story very different to the one they are told by the state-controlled press. Inside the issue, the former newspaper editor Cheng Yizhong speaks about how the Southern Metropolis Daily exposed the brutal “custody and repatriation” procedure used by the government on those without the correct ID, and the confinement and fatal beating of Sun Zhigang in 2003 (and subsequent cover-up). In 2004, Cheng was detained in secret for more than five months by the Guangdong authorities in 2004 for “economic crimes”, before being released.
In an exclusive essay, Cheng recounts the stifling conditions of media censorship in China, opening up about a media culture bombarded by “prohibitions” and riddled with informers who report directly to the government, in which only a minority of journalists are brave enough to fight the system.

Also in the issue is an interview conducted by activist artist Ai Weiwei of “a member of the “50 cent party” - a commenter paid half a dollar every time he derails an online debate in China”; Tibetan issues; persecution of human rights lawyers; and how artists of all stripes learn how to self-censor in order to succeed.
To preempt their domain — and the articles — from being blocked within China, the publication has uploaded the PDF version of the issue onto file sharing sites, writing, “Here is a direct link to the PDF, here is a link to the torrent file, here is a magnet link for the torrent, and here is a mirror of the torrent on Kickass Torrents. Please share.”
New Statesman, Taking on the Great Firewall of China.
Image: Ai Weiwei on the cover of the current issue of the New Statesmen
H/T: BoingBoing

futurejournalismproject:

New Statesman Tries to Bypass the Great Firewall

The New Statesman’s current issue focuses on China and the magazine has created a Mandarin version of it as a PDF. Their hope is to get the publication around Chinese censors by using various torrent sites.

Via the New Statesman:

What will [Chinese readers] find inside? A story very different to the one they are told by the state-controlled press. Inside the issue, the former newspaper editor Cheng Yizhong speaks about how the Southern Metropolis Daily exposed the brutal “custody and repatriation” procedure used by the government on those without the correct ID, and the confinement and fatal beating of Sun Zhigang in 2003 (and subsequent cover-up). In 2004, Cheng was detained in secret for more than five months by the Guangdong authorities in 2004 for “economic crimes”, before being released.

In an exclusive essay, Cheng recounts the stifling conditions of media censorship in China, opening up about a media culture bombarded by “prohibitions” and riddled with informers who report directly to the government, in which only a minority of journalists are brave enough to fight the system.

Also in the issue is an interview conducted by activist artist Ai Weiwei of “a member of the “50 cent party” - a commenter paid half a dollar every time he derails an online debate in China”; Tibetan issues; persecution of human rights lawyers; and how artists of all stripes learn how to self-censor in order to succeed.

To preempt their domain — and the articles — from being blocked within China, the publication has uploaded the PDF version of the issue onto file sharing sites, writing, “Here is a direct link to the PDF, here is a link to the torrent file, here is a magnet link for the torrent, and here is a mirror of the torrent on Kickass Torrents. Please share.”

New Statesman, Taking on the Great Firewall of China.

Image: Ai Weiwei on the cover of the current issue of the New Statesmen

H/T: BoingBoing

(via thenationmagazine)

October 18, 2012
theweekmagazine:

Fact-checking the second Obama-Romney debate: Who told the biggest whoppers? Fans of political drama got a real treat in Tuesday night’s town-hall rumble between President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney. The sparks flew as the candidates traded jabs, but the facts and figures did, too. And as in their last face-off, not all those numbers and assertions proved to be true — as the growing chorus of fact-chekcers were quick to point out. Here, a survey of some of the biggest disagreements, and which candidate hewed closer to the truth: 
Obama: Romney called Arizona’s immigration law “a model for the nation”The verdict: FalseRomney did call Arizona’s plan to fight illegal immigration a “model” — as in, “You know, I think you see a model here in Arizona” — in a February GOP primary debate in Phoenix. “But the president took Romney’s words out of context,” says The Boston Globe’s Borchers. Romney “was speaking specifically about the E-Verify employment screening system” in an older state law — not the controversial “show your papers” part of Arizona’s 2010 law, as Obama suggested. 
Romney: As governor, “I went to a number of women’s groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks,’ and they brought us whole binders full of women”The verdict: FalseIt’s worse than just awkward phrasing — this is “not a true story,” says David Bernstein at The Boston Phoenix. In 2002, before Romney was elected, a bipartisan group of women, calling themselves MassGAP, put together a long list of women qualified to fill every cabinet position and lead each state agency, commission, and authority, then presented it to Romney after he was elected. His claim in the debate, “that he asked for such a study, is false.” 
Romney: My plan will create 12 million jobs in four yearsThe verdict: Four PinocchiosRomney’s repeated claim “that his economic plan would produce 12 million jobs” sure “sounds like a pretty bold statement,” since only two presidents — Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan — have accomplished that feat, says The Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler. But his plan — mostly just “a collection of policy assertions, such as reducing debt, overhauling the tax code, fostering free trade, and so forth”— is “even less impressive than it sounds” when you realize that Moody’s Analytics and Macroeconomic Advisors both estimate that the U.S. economy will create at least 12 million new jobs no matter who is in the White House. In other words, says USA Today, “it is accurate that the U.S. economy is expected to gain 12 million jobs in the first term of the next president, but Romney’s job plan is not the reason.” 
Obama: ”What I’ve also said is, for (those earning) above $250,000, we can go back to the tax rates we had when Bill Clinton was president”The verdict: FalseObama’s statement is true “only for federal income tax rates,” saysFactCheck.org. Obama has proposed raising the income tax ceiling for the wealthiest households to the Clinton-era 39.6 percent, from George W. Bush’s 35 percent. But Obama failed to mention that he “already has enacted new taxes that also will fall on those same taxpayers” — a 0.9 percent Medicare payroll tax surcharge on wages above $250,000 per household and a 3.8 percent tax on investment income for the wealthy. “As a result many, if not most, high-income persons will pay more in federal taxes under Obama’s proposed rates than they did under Clinton.”
More fact-checking

theweekmagazine:

Fact-checking the second Obama-Romney debate: Who told the biggest whoppers? 

Fans of political drama got a real treat in Tuesday night’s town-hall rumble between President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney. The sparks flew as the candidates traded jabs, but the facts and figures did, too. And as in their last face-off, not all those numbers and assertions proved to be true — as the growing chorus of fact-chekcers were quick to point out. Here, a survey of some of the biggest disagreements, and which candidate hewed closer to the truth: 
  1. Obama: Romney called Arizona’s immigration law “a model for the nation”
    The verdict: False
    Romney did call Arizona’s plan to fight illegal immigration a “model” — as in, “You know, I think you see a model here in Arizona” — in a February GOP primary debate in Phoenix. “But the president took Romney’s words out of context,” says The Boston Globe’s Borchers. Romney “was speaking specifically about the E-Verify employment screening system” in an older state law — not the controversial “show your papers” part of Arizona’s 2010 law, as Obama suggested.
     
  2. Romney: As governor, “I went to a number of women’s groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks,’ and they brought us whole binders full of women”
    The verdict: False
    It’s worse than just awkward phrasing — this is “not a true story,” says David Bernstein at The Boston Phoenix. In 2002, before Romney was elected, a bipartisan group of women, calling themselves MassGAP, put together a long list of women qualified to fill every cabinet position and lead each state agency, commission, and authority, then presented it to Romney after he was elected. His claim in the debate, “that he asked for such a study, is false.”
     
  3. Romney: My plan will create 12 million jobs in four years
    The verdict: Four Pinocchios
    Romney’s repeated claim “that his economic plan would produce 12 million jobs” sure “sounds like a pretty bold statement,” since only two presidents — Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan — have accomplished that feat, says The Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler. But his plan — mostly just “a collection of policy assertions, such as reducing debt, overhauling the tax code, fostering free trade, and so forth”— is “even less impressive than it sounds” when you realize that Moody’s Analytics and Macroeconomic Advisors both estimate that the U.S. economy will create at least 12 million new jobs no matter who is in the White House. In other words, says USA Today, “it is accurate that the U.S. economy is expected to gain 12 million jobs in the first term of the next president, but Romney’s job plan is not the reason.”
     
  4. Obama: ”What I’ve also said is, for (those earning) above $250,000, we can go back to the tax rates we had when Bill Clinton was president”
    The verdict: False
    Obama’s statement is true “only for federal income tax rates,” saysFactCheck.org. Obama has proposed raising the income tax ceiling for the wealthiest households to the Clinton-era 39.6 percent, from George W. Bush’s 35 percent. But Obama failed to mention that he “already has enacted new taxes that also will fall on those same taxpayers” — a 0.9 percent Medicare payroll tax surcharge on wages above $250,000 per household and a 3.8 percent tax on investment income for the wealthy. “As a result many, if not most, high-income persons will pay more in federal taxes under Obama’s proposed rates than they did under Clinton.”

More fact-checking

October 18, 2012
breakingnews:

‘Newsweek’ to transition to all-digital format
The Daily Beast: News magazine, ‘Newsweek,’ is about to make the transition to an all-digital format in early 2013. The final print edition in the US will be its Dec. 31 issue. Tina Brown and Baba Shetty write that the all-digital publication will be named ‘Newsweek Global,’ and it will be a worldwide edition targeted for a mobile audience. 
Brown and Shetty say the publication will be supported by paid subscription with select content available on The Daily Beast.
Image: The May 10, 2010 cover of Newsweek.

breakingnews:

‘Newsweek’ to transition to all-digital format

The Daily Beast: News magazine, ‘Newsweek,’ is about to make the transition to an all-digital format in early 2013. The final print edition in the US will be its Dec. 31 issue. Tina Brown and Baba Shetty write that the all-digital publication will be named ‘Newsweek Global,’ and it will be a worldwide edition targeted for a mobile audience. 

Brown and Shetty say the publication will be supported by paid subscription with select content available on The Daily Beast.

Image: The May 10, 2010 cover of Newsweek.

October 9, 2012

thedailyfeed:

Now that Lena Dunham scored a $3.7 million book deal from Random House, is she the new Tina Fey

September 26, 2012
Career vs economy: the graduate jobseeker conundrum

A thought-provoking article on the trials and tribulations faced by many a graduate today.

September 26, 2012
The 90 Day Challenge

My good friend Tiffani Adams wants you to get FIT and HEALTHY! Follow the 90 Day Challenge and see what it can do for you!

September 5, 2012

Bahrain portion of iRevolution on CNN June 19 2011 (by JFhsfohhMN)

The documentary that CNNi refused to air. To date, no reason has been given to why they refused. 

Considering it was produced by its own CNN team, that’s very odd…don’t you think? 

Credit: Amber Lyon

September 5, 2012

Daley - Those Who Wait (by DaleyUK)

September 4, 2012
Why do you need to study journalism to be a journalist?

If you’re a young, recently graduated journalist who feels as though your degree was rather pointless, then fear not, because having once read through this, you will soon begin to realise that it was all worth it. 

Have a read:

Mark Twain once wrote, “The only place where success comes before work, is in the dictionary.”

   This quotation is ever relevant in the discussion of the use of studying journalism, as it expresses the ubiquitous belief of study that is commonplace in all eras and fields. Such association of studying and achievement is the method palpable in all areas of studying and thus it is a basis for examining the need to study journalism, in order to become a journalist.

Traditionally, journalism can be defined as it is in the dictionary as: ‘The profession of collecting, writing and publishing news through newspapers and magazines, or by radio and television.’

This connotes a sense of importance, and thus one can assume that the study of journalism is required. Although this is true, background information on the history of journalism suggests that studying journalism is not the only means of access into the industry, and so the value of studying journalism needs to be evaluated in light of this information.

Historically, the profession of journalism has been synonymous with the truth and exposing it. The initial stories covered by the media, purport to offer their audience honest accounts and so it can be assumed that journalists have to study journalism in order to promote accuracy. Indeed, Emile DeGiradin expresses that ‘the power of words is immense’. This is in keeping with the view, that a career in journalism is reliant upon the understanding of the importance of what is said - for words are a powerful means of communication. Despite the history, the word ‘journalist’ now has many different connotations, as the use of this word is increasingly abused in order to sell copies of newspapers and so on. So, the various notions of journalism need to be discussed in order to analyse the extent to which studying journalism is needed to work in the industry.

For many people, modern examples of writers such as T.V star Jade Goody, ‘it- girl’ Tara Palmer- Tompkinson and the daughter of a celebrity - Peaches Geldof, can be viewed as proof that one does not need to study journalism to have a career in journalism. All three of the aforementioned write columns in famous magazines that are sold all around Britain, without having studied journalism, and yet are classed as journalists - in the modern sense of the word.

Despite this, the credibility of such ‘journalists’ is debateable - as without the relevant education, such writers cannot be classed as reliable or plausible sources. Therefore, a negative stigma is attached to such writers who enter the industry, and so in the true sense of the word, journalism can be considered as prestigious as ever. Catherine Belsey expresses the opinion commonplace that perceives any theory learnt as better than nothing; ‘…there is no practice without theory, however much that theory is suppressed, unformulated or perceived as “obvious”. In view of this, we can acknowledge how the study of journalism foregrounds the process of creating journalistic work. 

On the other hand, renowned journalists such as Trevor MacDonald and Jeremy Paxman have had successful careers in journalism despite only having studied English Literature. These days though, if you acquire a degree in journalism at University it is viewed as an advantage because you gain, at first hand, a greater depth of knowledge and a greater insight into the subject. Education was creating for the purpose of enlightening and benefiting students, and so one can perceive the study of journalism to be essential to a career in journalism. In support of this, the National Council for the Training of Journalists is the examination body for journalism courses which prides itself on developing a scheme of study that ‘meets the demands of the 21st Century’.

Nowadays, the lack of journalistic study before a career in journalism can be perceived as a short coming. Due to the fact that journalism remains to this date a competitive industry, the more knowledge you have, the better your position in the employment hierarchy. Despite the increasing emergence of celebrity writers, journalism is still commonly regarded as a profession of skill. Indeed news reporters, for example, provide the public with what is essentially the first draft of history. This places importance upon their role, and as legal requirements are to be learnt in order to be adhered to, it can be said that you need to study journalism in this instance. This highlights how the relevance of studying journalism is dependant on the type of journalist you wish to be - as although celebrities such as Kerry Katona can be described as journalists because they write for magazines, they are writing their opinions rather than writing news and so their lack of journalistic qualifications limits their careers. Additionally, it is not uncommon for their writing to be discriminated against, because they do not have sufficient qualifications to make respected or valued judgements.

Furthermore, today’s society is one where courses in journalism are increasing and so this works to support the argument, that the necessity for journalism studies in a rapidly growing industry, is becoming ever relevant. A foundation of successful studies is an invaluable foundation, as 21st century employees face the competitive world of work. ‘Becoming a professional writer is not an easy task. The new writer faces stiff competition from the experienced writers who have proven track records.’

There is, however, an argument for working your way up in a company that can be derived from this. Indeed, if you leave school to become a journalist without gaining a degree in journalism you may adopt the notion that work experience is paramount. This is true, as work experience does provide a basis for a career, and it does not mean you are a bad journalist if you have not had formal training. However, most degrees now offer students the opportunity to gain work experience during the second or third year of their course. This gives such students, the upper hand and means that aspiring journalists with work experience alone, are not certain of securing a career within the industry - and so one can conclude from this that the study of journalism is needed for a successful career.

Traditionally, journalists are viewed as people who are to work whilst abiding by laws. The working definition of Libel, Contempt and the Human Rights Act, need to be revised in order to be implemented during journalistic practice. The study of such legal requirements is essential, by law, and so it can thus be argued that you cannot be a journalist in the legal sense of the word if you do not study journalism.

In conclusion, the study of journalism is to be regarded as the most successful means of gaining entry into the industry. There are five main branches of journalism: newspapers, magazines, TV, radio and online and even though it is possible to learn the trade on the job, formal training is a necessary requirement. The valuable skills provide a solid basis in shorthand, law and how government works, and the study of journalism is recognised by employers as desirable.

So there you have it. My personal take on three years at university, studying the subject I cherish and love. 

August 22, 2012
Robbie 'Flash' Wojciechowski: The Media In Austerity: Exploitation & Corruption

almostflash:

Today I want to ask you a question - one that remains unspoken, existing as an unwritten rule for the budding freelancer that should never be contradicted. A question many of us probably don’t have the balls to answer because of employment, reputation, or its consequences. But, you know…

Liked posts on Tumblr: More liked posts »